Social Security News 04-25-12

Speaking Monday on the PBS News Hour, Nancy J. Altman, author of The Battle for Social Security and co-director of the advocacy group Social Security Works, noted that the “Social Security system from the beginning has been very closely monitored and has always been very conservatively managed. So every year, it projects out 75 years. Now, when you project out that far, you are going to show these fluctuations. Recent trustees reports have shown that the exhaustion date is 2028. Others have shown 2048. So 2033, 2035, 2036 are all within that range.”

The best way to improve Social Security's value for all Americans is by increasing benefits to better serve the neediest workers and expanding its reach to cover workers and dependents who have been cheated by or excluded from the system for far too long.

Must Read: An Economy for AllHere are some headlines you won't see after the government releases new figures on Social Security and Medicare later today: "Social Security Trust Fund Even Larger Than It Was Last Year" "Growing

Greenspan’s calculations were based on the presumption that income distribution in the United States would remain reasonable—just as it had since America learned the lessons of the how extraordinary disparities in income distribution lead to extraordinarily unfortunate economic events like the Great Depression.

Back in March, Altmire released an attack ad stating that “Mark Critz and I agree on many things but there are some big differences between us. Mark Critz … didn’t vote against the Tea Party budget that would dismantle Medicare and gut Social Security.”

Two conservative Democrats who voted against the president’s health care plan went down in defeat Tuesday, falling victim to primary opponents who cast them as far out of step with their party. Redistricting played a role in both defeats. Pennsylvania Rep. Jason Altmire lost to Rep. Mark Critz, a fellow Democrat who was drawn into the same southwestern...

They seemed to doubt the Obama administration's arguments against the controversial law Supreme Court justices on Wednesday appeared highly doubtful of the Obama administration’s objections to a controversial immigration law in Arizona. The ideologically diverse group of justices pummeled Solicitor General Donald Verrilli with a morning full of questions, expressing serious doubts to the government’s claim that Arizona cannot require state law enforcement officials to verify a person’s legal status when they’re stopped on suspicion of committing a separate offense.